Gate question

[sebber]

Hello everybody,

I've got a question about the gate that I can't solve for quite a while now.

I thought that when I hit the switch I'd send a positive signal to the gate directly and make the sequencer send one, too. 1+1=0 would make the XOR do nothing. But it does not only blink, it sends a signal, too
Where am I wrong?

---

XOR question.pch2
Description:		Download (listen)
Filename:	XOR question.pch2
Filesize:	1.13 KB
Downloaded:	1313 Time(s)

---

[blue hell]

What I think .. in general the length of the pulse from the switch output will be different from the length of the first pulse out of the sequencer.

like this for a slow running sequencer.

[blue hell]

Sorry, took me a while to get the image right, the x's are don't know's.

[Kassen]

Hmmmm. Yes, of cource sequencer puleses aren't relative to the sequencer's speed since the poor sequencer can't be expected to know how fast it'll be going in the future. That does lead to the question what we would do if we'd need pulses that *are* relative tot he bpm (or Hz if you wish). I can think of many aplications where they realy should be ralative. Hmmmm, that needs some thought.

[sebber]

Well, I inserted pulse modules on both sides, so the impulse on the gate had the same length. Doesn't change anything. Maybe there's a little latency due to calculation in the sequencer but since there's not really much not calculate I doubt that.

What I wanted to accomplish is a patch where I can trigger a sequence to run twice and then stop - until the next trigger. Actually I am in learn mode because I want to G2ize this patch by Rob.




It can be done exactly like it's shown there, but since we have a gate and a flip-flop, why not use it?
Doing it with the flip-flop is actually Rob's assignment here

BTW, can't find the workshop on Clavia's pages anymore.

I think that workshop should be online. I've got a spare one here.

[Kassen]

How about taking a flipflop set tot he "set/reset" mode (not the "toggle) one).

Your flipflop 2nd (inverted) output is normally outputting one; you take the the clock and a binary counter to make the fliplflop go zero after 32 clock ticks. "And" that one with the clock to become the sequencer's clock.

Now the sequencer only receives the clock for 32 pulses and after that the flipflop goes low, breaking the chain. To start it again you send a reset to both the flipflop and that sequencer after which it'll take another 32 steps.

You could also do the same with just two counts of the "link" output of the sequencer but I'm not entirely certain that won't overshoot to still set the seq. back to the "1" so be carefull there.

[mosc]

But I just noticed how much better looking the NM1 graphics look than the G2. The knobs and the jacks are more three-dimensional.

[Kassen]

[jksuperstar]

I think Howard was saying his own post was about to be off topic, and that he likes the look of the NM1 editor over the G2 editor.

Here's a patch to run twice after a trigger. It uses the LINK output (ie- end of sequencer) to run a counter. That counter clears a set/reset flop that allows the clock to reach the sequencer. Using this method, it is easy to change the length of the sequence, or change the number of times you allow the seq to run after trigger.

---

g2_seq_twice.JPG
Description:	A building block to allow a sequencer to run twice after trigger
Filesize:	28.29 KB
Viewed:	10823 Time(s)

---

[Kassen]

Ah, whoops. The "grumpy boss" style of the smiley threw me off.

[sebber]

Aargh, I just found out that I solved the do-it-two-times thingy already

I got confused when BlueHell asked me what I needed it for. The gate question came up, when I tried to solve the 2times problem, it is not the problem itself anymore. I'm sorry I got confused about that!

So, attached patch will do it, but now I'm just where I started. Remember, the Gate question, why does that thing go blink?

---

WSL9.pch2
Description:		Download (listen)
Filename:	WSL9.pch2
Filesize:	1.52 KB
Downloaded:	1289 Time(s)

---

[blue hell]

I'm sorry to have confused you.

The answer is still the same though IMO ... timing differences in the pulses, even with the pulse modules added it would not be sample accurate and one sample time timing difference will bring you a pulse still on the Xor output.

Maybe making all involved signals red and orange will help (as the patch compiler does more work on those signals to try to solve timing problems) but that is pretty expensive CPU wise.

Synchronizing the signals (for instance by using S&H modules or FlipFlops) or finding a different solution to solve the problem is a better way to go. (this was the reason why I asked for what you wanted to do with the circuit, to try to come to a different solution).

[mosc]

Yes, I was describing my own post as OT. We could use an OT emoticon with a smile - a way to excuse yourself if you just can resist. Sorry again.

[Kassen]

It's ok, everybody makes a oops every now and then.

I did too, thanks to JKS for pointing out (graphically) you need to reset the counter too when you trigger the whole thing because conceivably it'll be trigered while it runs. That does count against the clocked delay option.

Depending on the total CPU and zero page cost of the patch it might still pay off to flush the delay with a quick series of pulses but that that point it all becomes rather accedemic...

[sebber]

BlueHell, your advice is a good one for me: I'll try to be more pragmatic. And pragmatism on a flexible system is finding another way.

Thanks everybody for your input!